9 replies to this topic

[thefirstimmortal]

X-Message-Number: 8 From: Kevin Q. Brown Subject: reply potpourri Date: 5 Aug 1988

> 1) ALCOR was raided by a coroner's office. On balance the raid and
> persecution of ALCOR seems to be politically/publicity oriented.
> Could legal harassment freeze cryonics in its tracks? As a
> suspension member, are you worried whether the organization you
> chose will exist long enough to perform the procedure (may that be
> a long way off!) and long enough to provide many years of
> refrigeration?

ALCOR won a major legal precedent for cryonics by obtaining a permanent
injunction against the Riverside County coroner that prevents him from
thawing out (for autopsy) any of the people in cryonic suspension at ALCOR.
This is an accomplishment unheard of elsewhere. To obtain that injunction,
ALCOR enlisted several influential scientists/technologists, including Eric
Drexler, to testify on behalf of the reasonability of cryonic suspension.
They convinced the judge that people in cryonic suspension have a chance for
recovery and that they therefore have some rights that the coroner, in
particular, is not allowed to violate.

Local and state government authorities still do pose a considerable threat.
A bad law could make cryonicists pack up their bags and begin again elsewhere.
Worse yet, authorities could use their power to continually harass cryonics

organizations and "grind them down" by causing them enormous financial hardship.
In fact, my major concern about the likelihood of revival from cryonic
suspension is not the technical feasibility of reanimation, but rather the
difficulty of creating an organization that will successfully preserve a person
long enough to be reanimated.

Yet, it would take a lot to "freeze cryonics in its tracks". My optimism is
based mostly on my experience with the members of ALCOR. The ALCOR
people are quite determined to do whatever it takes to ensure that suspension
members are safely suspended and preserved. This last January, in the case of
Dora Kent, they were literally quite willing to be hauled away in handcuffs
rather than tell the Riverside County coroner where they had stored Dora Kent.

(The Riverside County coroner had threatened to thaw her out to get an autopsy.)
Some weeks after the raid on ALCOR, Mike Darwin (then president of ALCOR) wrote
in the (late) Jan. 1988 issue of Cryonics:
"The past seven weeks have been sheer hell -- but they have also been an
amazing, positive adventure as well. I am confident now that Alcor has
leaders other than Mike Darwin and Jerry Leaf who are capable of taking the
helm and steering the ship successfully. I am also confident that we have
a fierce and dedicated suspension membership. The incredible loyalty and
support that has been shown cannot even begin to be characterized here."
If this makes you think that the members of ALCOR are very stubbornly
determined to survive, you're right.

[thefirstimmortal]

X-Message-Number: 29
From: Kevin Q. Brown
Subject: CSNY notes and legal status of cryonics
Date: 17 Oct 1988

(In particular, cryonics redefines death, and that can remarkably
change a person's legal status.)
In the Dora Kent case, the judge ruled this past February that the Riverside
County coroner did NOT have the right to autopsy Dora Kent (or any of the other
people in cryonic suspension under the care of ALCOR) because there was a
chance that she (and they) may someday be reanimated and an autopsy would
destroy that chance.

[thefirstimmortal]

X-Message-Number: 38
From: "(Roy R. Beatty) Keane, Inc.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: SAUL KENT, ET AL VS RAYMOND L. CARRILLO, ET AL| 2/1/88 DEPT 10| R 191277

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COUNSEL: Ashworth Hinman Reikus | REPORTER: Masih

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROCEEDING: RULING ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE COURT FINDS:
1. That the Coroner threatens to thaw the remains of decedents in
suspension at the Alcor Foundation even though the Coroner has stated that
he has no intention "at this time to thaw out or otherwise remove them from
cryonic suspension" which act would be in violation of the rights of the
decedents.

2. That the Coroner threatens to thaw the remains of Dora Kent if
and when such remains are found which act [sic] would be in violation of
the rights of said decedent.

3. That the thawing of the remains of the decedents at the Alcor
Foundation and of Dora Kent, if and when found, would produce irreparable
injury.

4. No evidence that Dora Kent was alive when she was decapitated.

5. That the Coroner has not nor does he threaten to destroy or
alter any form of death certificate pertaining to Dora Kent, whether
issued or not.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Raymond L. Carrillo, the Coroner of Riverside
County, his agents, employees, attorneys and all other persons under his
direction or control or acting in concert with him, are restrained from
engaging in or committing any of the following acts:
1. Removing or causing any of the remains of human bodies
presently located in or at the premises of Alcor Life Extension Foundation,
12327 Doherty Street, Riverside, California, to be removed from cryonic
suspension until further order of this Court.

2. In the event of any further remains of Dora Kent are discovered
and are in cryonic suspension, from removing or causing such remains to be
removed from cryonic suspension until further order of this Court.

Let a Preliminary Injunction issue upon posting of a bond in the amount
of $2,500.00.

Counsel for moving party shall serve and present to the Court a form
of written preliminary injunction in accordance with this order and file the
undertaking on or before 4:30 pm, on 2/5/88.

MICELI, Judge
---------------------------------------------------
| / | R/A | | CAL. |/3| ATTY(S). | | | BOOTH(ss), Clerk

[thefirstimmortal]

Amazing New Legal Development
Venturist Monthly News, Vol. 2(1), Jan. 1990, #13
by Mike Perry (Editor)

Very recently there has been an amazing development on the legal front.
The action stems from the Dora Kent case, which involved the cryonic suspension
of Dora Kent (mother of longtime cryonics activist Saul Kent) by the Alcor
Life Extension Foundation on December 11, 1987. Mrs. Kent, an 83-year old
bedfast woman suffering from severe dementia, was brought to the Alcor facility

while still alive and died there. No physician was present when death occurred,
though some of the Alcor staff had sufficient medical training to competently
pronounce death. The cryonic suspension procedure was started promptly after
death, and completed under better than usual conditions. (Normally death
occurs under hospital conditions and there is some difficulty and delay while
the patient is transferred out to the facility where the suspension can
continue.)
Since the suspension was done under unusual conditions, though, it resulted
in a coroner's investigation, one consequence of which was that Alcor was
apparently under threat of prosecution for "unlawful practice of medicine."
To forestall such prosecution Alcor asked for injunctive relief on grounds
that "such a threat of prosecution results in an impermissible chilling of
the constitutional right of the Adherents to have their bodies receive
direct physical ministrations before clinical death in order to achieve
cryonic suspension of their remains." [Presiding Judge Robert J. Timlin's
summarization, in the ruling handed down on this case. Other quotations in
this article are from this document.[1]] The motion for relief was denied on
grounds that the state has an overriding interest "to alleviate pain during
any such suspension activities and to allow natural death during which period
a competent adherent may change his or her mind regarding such suspension."
This means that certain actions that would normally require a licensed
physician would not be exempted from this requirement in the case of cryonic
suspension. Whether such actions might have been performed on Dora Kent
prior to her death, by non-physicians, would be a matter to be decided.
(At least, to the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence that bears up
under scrutiny that she was physically harmed or that her death was
unnaturally hastened, which considerably weakens any claim that wrongdoing
occurred.) Thus the District Attorney (in Riverside County, California,
where Alcor is located) may still prosecute if he so chooses, though at
present there is no indication of any intention on his part to do so.
(In fact, Alcor attorney Christopher Ashworth now considers such
prosecution unlikely.)
The 25-page ruling prepared by Judge Timlin attempts to address all the
important issues bearing on this case. On page 11 there is an amazing
paragraph that reads as follows (emphasis in the original):
"This court concludes that the Adherents, including Dora Kent, under
Article I, Section 1 of the California Constitution and the Fifth
and Ninth amendments to the United States Constitution have a right
to privacy, which includes the right to exercise control over his/her
own body, and to determine whether to submit his/her body, or any
portion thereof, including the brain, to PREMORTEM cryonic suspension.
(In ruling on the application this court in no way comments directly
or indirectly in the wisdom of such a choice.)"
In one fell swoop, it seems, the constitutional right to be cryonically
suspended is being recognized (a matter that itself is currently being
litigated by Alcor!), and moreover, the right to a PREMORTEM SUSPENSION!
There is a further comment on page 20:
"It is understood that a person may at a particular time in his/her
life desire death and no further medical treatment and thereupon
exercise his/her right to refuse such medical treatment and allow
nature to take its course. But if a person desires to interfere
with natural death processes by hastening it through suspension
activities, (assumed to be natural methods,) the state has a
compelling interest to require a licensed physician to perform
those activities, which involve the practice of medicine, if for
no other purpose than to alleviate pain and discomfort associated
with such suspension activities."
Apparently, this is a reaffirmation of the opinion that a person has the
right to have death hastened "through suspension activities" (i.e. a
premortem suspension) provided said activities are performed by a licensed
physician! The primary reason why a physician must perform the services is,
apparently, to insure that there is no undue pain or discomfort in the
process!
Well, to put it mildly, all this seems way too good to be true (despite
the superficial defeat in denying Alcor's motion for injunctive relief).
Possibly the judge is assuming that only "natural methods" of hastening
death (refusal of food and fluids?) plus medication to relieve pain or
discomfort, must be used. This would mean, for example, that a person
desiring a premortem suspension must still undergo a horrible and possibly
permanently damaging regimen of self-deprivation (as actually happened in
a recent cryonic suspension [2]), rather than being promptly suspended when
the time was right. However this is not clearly spelled out in the ruling.
It is too early to tell, of course, what impact this ruling will have on
gaining legal recognition for cryonics and in particular, on the vital
question of premortem cryonic suspensions. It would seem, though, that
"some good must come of it." What that precisely will be, I hope to
report in future issues of this newsletter.

References
1. "Ruling on application for preliminary injunction", Saul Kent et. al. v.
Grover C. Trask II, Superior Court of the State of California, County of
Riverside, Dec. 15, 1989, case #201022.
2. Darwin, M. "A Suspension in Detroit" Cryonics 10(5) 21 (May, 1989, pub.
by Alcor Foundation, Riverside, CA)

[thefirstimmortal]

X-Message-Number: 232
From: STEPHEN BRIDGE
ALCOR WINS BIG!
A News announcement from Steve Bridge

October 3 will be a holiday for the Germans, but for cryonicists
October 2nd will be independence day. On that day, a California judge
agreed with Alcor in its suit against the California Department of Health
Services, effectively making cryonics OVERTLY legal in California.

Among other points, The DHS is now prohibited from denying completed
death certificates and other forms (including the infamous VS-9, the
disposition of human remains permit) to Alcor and other organizations, at
least on any basis that cryonics is somehow improper or illegal. In
addition, DHS is enjoined from making statements to hospitals, coroners,
physicians, the press, etc., to the effect that cryonics is illegal or
improper.

I do not have a list at the moment of the eight specific points
which Alcor had asked the judge to rule on, but Carlos Mondragon, Alcor's
President, told me that the judge sided with Alcor on each point and that
the judge was very careful to address each issue. The DHS could possibly
appeal but our attorneys say that the odds on DHS winning the appeal are
microscopic. Apparently the Attorney General's office even told the DHS
people to settle with Alcor on this, because Alcor was in the right.

[thefirstimmortal]

X-Message-Number: 397
...we do not live in a libertarian
world, and we may have some tough decisions ahead that will cause many
nights of soul-searching. I for one tend to say that my life is more
important than my philosophy.

I also know that in January 1988 I saw the Alcor building in Riverside
gutted by a swat team, and I almost saw an Alcor patient thawed out by
a coroner and several friends of mine framed for first degree murder.
That's as close as I ever want to get to a disaster! NEVER AGAIN!
NEVER, NEVER, NEVER! That experience surely should teach us one thing:
Don't expect to take refuge in libertarian philosophy if you ever find
yourself staring down the barrel of a gun that has a non-libertarian
finger on its trigger!

[thefirstimmortal]

This has ALREADY HAPPENED ONCE!

How much do you know about the aftermath of the Dora Kent suspension?
Not much for most of you, because Alcor was only about a hundred
people in late 1987, and a lot of the background is not well
known--even to the people who were members then. That episode
destroyed Jerry Leaf's career with UCLA, (and almost certainly
contributed to his death) and nearly did the same for Steve's.
Defending Dr. Steve Harris from the Bureau of Medical Quality
Assurance cost Alcor about $45,000 in attorney fees. I was not on the
board then, but I know Carlos insisted to the other board members at
that time that Alcor had to establish a record of defending any
professionals who are attacked for their association with us. This is
one point where Carlos and a certain other former staffer were in
perfect agreement. (On a comic/tragic note, BMQA only let up on Steve
when a former Alcor staffer ran their investigator out of the Alcor
facility at gunpoint. The investigator never came back, but, for
obvious reasons, the staffer had to be terminated.)


Let me illustrate my concerns about Saul (or other members who
"attract the attention of important people") by pulling up a long
quote from the January 11, 1988 affidavit of Allen Eugene Kunzman.

Kunzman, a coroner deputy, was appearing before Judge Hollenhorst in
support of the search warrant which was used in a solid attempt by the
coroner's office to shut down Alcor. We will never know how close the
coroners came to ending Alcor, but *they* thought they had put Alcor
out of business, and said so to anyone who called Alcor or the
coroner's office on that long, long day of January 12th, 1988.

[Q's are questions by a deputy DA, and A's are by Kunzman.]

[Starting on page 4]

Q. Also did you seize [in the previous raid] what appear to be
invoices slips there at the Alcor facility that day?

A. Yes.

Q. Would you explain what those were to us, explain them to the
judge?

A. They were on N.C.R. paper, a copy of an invoice-type receipt, and
on the receipt it indicated that property had been purchased by or
sold to the U.C.L.A. Medical Center and shipped to an address in
Hollywood Florida, and below that an authorization of "By Jerry Leaf."

Q. So, this looks like a shipping invoice where someone had sold
medical equipment to the U.C.L.A. Medical Center but had it shipped to
an address in Hollywood, Florida, in the United States?

A. Yes.

Q. The person approving that, his name on it was as Jerry Leaf?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, let's tell the Judge somewhat about Mr. Leaf.
What were you aware of Mr. Jerry Leaf's association being with
Alcor and with that facility at 12327 Doherty, if any?

A. Okay. On the occasions that we have been out at the Alcor
facility he has identified himself as the vice president of Alcor.

Q. All right. Do you know how long he has been the vice president of
Alcor?

A. At least since February of '87, when they opened at this location.

Q. Are you aware Alcor had previously operated at another facility in
Orange County, California.

A. Yes, we are.

Q. As far as you can tell was Mr. Leaf associated with Alcor at that
facility, also?

A. Yes, he was.

Q. Now, I want to just ask quickly two other names. Saul Kent, are
you aware of any association he has with Jerry Leaf and/or Alcor?

A. Yes. He is a member of Alcor; and we have spoken with him,
also, at the Alcor location here in Riverside.

Q. How about Steve Rudell?

A. Steve Rudell, we discovered a file on him at the Alcor facility
during our search. He is listed as a member of Alcor.

Q. Okay. Fine. Now, just briefly can you describe to us what kind
of operation or what kind of business facility is located that at
Alcor at 12327 from your observation of it?

A. At that location currently the are freezing human heads and
they currently have one human body frozen. They indicated they
are also doing animal research at that facility.

Q. Does it appear to be what is commonly called a cryonics facility?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Now, previous to February of 1987, are you aware through your
investigation of another cryonics type of facility that was doing
business in Hollywood, Florida, United States of America?

A. Yes, we are.

Q. How are you aware of that, and tell us about that, please.

A. All right. Information on the death of Dora Kent and some of the
paperwork we have, there was an address listed in Hollywood Florida.
That address was investigated, and I contacted the Hollywood,
Florida, Police Department. They informed me in February of 1987, a
drug raid had gone down a that location at the Life Extension
Foundation, and Steve Rudell was arrested at that time in possession
of a pound of cocaine.

Q. Okay.

A. Now, Mr. Saul Kent was the president of the Life Extension
Foundation in Hollywood, Florida.

Q. All right. So, the connection there is that the two men you
mention, Saul Kent and Steve Rudell, were associated with the
Life Extension Foundation in Hollywood, Florida, and are also
presently members and associated with Alcor Corporation, 12327
Doherty Street, here in Riverside County, correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Jerry Leaf is the vice president of the Alcor Foundation here
at Doherty Street in Riverside?

A. Correct.

Q. He is associated through that with Saul Kent and Steve Rudell?

A. Correct.

Q. In addition to that, when you were conducting your search in Alcor
in riverside did you find any information in their files about the
Hollywood, Florida, facility?

A. Yes, we did. In the Steve Rudell file there were a number of
newspaper articles written about the drug raid and the problems they
had experienced in Hollywood, Florida at that foundation.

Q. All right. Does it appear to you that the Life Extension
Corporation in Hollywood, Florida, is in the same town of Hollywood,
Florida, as the shipping invoices showing U.C.L.A. medical equipment
being sent there?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. Now, let's go back to Mr. Jerry Leaf then again for a
movement.

*************************

[The last word here obviously should have been "moment." The
affidavit goes on with further and rather equivocal information from a
UCLA cop about Jerry and his lack of authority to spend UCLA money on
stuff shipped to Florida.]

The point to this long quote is that innocent activities (and Jerry's
were certainly that) can be given a criminal slant when an agent of
the state manages to associate you with people who have had serious
problems with the law. No question about it, the power of the
government *is* something to worry about.

(My response to this affidavit--when it was unsealed months later--was
a six page single space letter of protest to the judge, followed by a
phone call, a letter to the Grand Jury--which eventually helped spark
an investigation of the coroner's office--and a letter to the
commission which reviews judicial performance. I have an entire file
drawer full of letters I wrote that year on behalf of Alcor. If
someone really wants to see them, I could dig some of them out and
post them.)

It pains me to dig through these files. My guess is that Steve never
realized how much the background of Saul and Co. contributed to our
difficulties (which were very much *his* difficulties too) or he has
suppressed the memory. I don't claim the kind of conspiracy
construction you see in Kunzman's testimony (which led up to the second
and much more damaging raid) is fair, because it is not. I do think
it is about typical of what we can expect from police investigators.
(Many of you are aware of the Secret Service excesses such as Steve
Jackson was subjected to.) Even though it was plenty bad, the search
could have gone a lot worse than it did. Next time, we (including the
patients) might not be so lucky.

It is worth noting that the next night's postings contained unfettered
support for Saul by Brian Wowk (who was not in cryonics at the time),
and very cautious support for Saul by Thomas Donaldson who was deeply
involved in the mess.

In spite of my differences with Saul, I *strongly* support him in his
fight with the FDA. But I am acuity aware that people who are doing
things (which I consider moral) in defiance of silly governmental
regulations are forced by circumstances into violating a long list of
other laws, such as the tax and currency regulations. It becomes all
to easy for them to make light of actions that agents of the state
take very seriously. Mixing these with as culturally marginal an
activity as cryonics is a formula which has already blown up in our
faces.

In the light of the history I have pulled out of my files, do you
think I am justifiably concerned with Saul having a lot of influence
over Alcor?

Merry Christmas,

Keith Henson
(member of the board--at least for now)

[thefirstimmortal]

X-Message-Number: 1515
Date: 26 Dec 92 03:54:45 EST
From: Saul Kent <71043.1120@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: CRYONICS: Reply To Keith Henson

Keith Henson (msg 1509) suggests that my troubles with the FDA may have
"led up to" the second raid of Alcor by the Riverside Coroner during
the Dora Kent crisis, without providing any substantiating evidence.

Keith also suggests that I may have violated "a long list" of laws,
"such as the tax and currency regulations", without providing a shred
of evidence that I have ever done so.

Such speculation is both inappropriate and unwarranted.

I agree with Keith that my battles with the FDA pose some degree of risk
to Alcor. But I'm neither a member of the Alcor Board, nor am I a
candidate for the Board. I play no role in the governing of Alcor, nor
do I plan to.

Saul Kent

[thefirstimmortal]

X-Message-Number: 1520
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 21:37:21 CST
From: Brian Wowk <wowk@ccu.UManitoba.CA>
Subject: CRYONICS: short memory

Keith, I know you had your hands full, but I'm truly shocked
that you would say I wasn't "in cryonics" during the Dora Kent crisis
(Dec. 1987 - early 1988). I have been a cryonics activist since 1986
(my first articles for Cryonics magazine appeared that year), and became
Alcor's 95th Suspension Member in May 1987. Mike Darwin and I were
deeply involved in writing the new Blue Book when the crisis began. I
spoke with you and your wife frequently by phone during the crisis, and
worked closely with you on a project to get the Coroner's office
harassed by the State Department. Also at your request, I joined as a
Plaintiff in the successful Electronic Communications Privacy Act
lawsuit launched against Riverside County in 1990. I was eligible to do
so because communications of mine were siezed during the Coroner's Jan.
1988 raid on the Alcor facility. Finally, I contributed about two
thousand dollars toward Alcor's legal defense during the crisis (which
was not tax deductible here in Canada). To have helped Alcor during its
time of need, and then be forgotten this way is quite unfair.

Moreover, you have used your forgetfulness to undermine my
credibility. Despite your posting, I have been involved in cryonics
about just as long as you, and have known Saul Kent personally for that
same length of time. I have also been following Saul's work and writing
for the past ten years, which I doubt you have. In short, I resent
being depicted as a cryonics neophyte.

--- Brian Wowk